Tolerance Reassessment Advisory Committee

Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only. Although the information provided here was accurate and current when first created, it is now outdated.

TRAC 5/27/98

Staff Background Paper # 2.5

Registration Division's Priority Planning System:

Setting the Queue for Registration Actions

Historically, Registration Division (RD) reviewed new registration and tolerance actions based upon a system of "first received, first reviewed."
In 1995, RD shifted this approach to one where pesticide companies identified their top business priorities as the primary basis for setting the registration.
In 1997, RD shifted to a process that established priority in the registration queue based upon certain environmental and societal goals:

- Ensure that the nation's food supply and food production system continues to be safe, plentiful, and nutritious and strive to make it safer;
- Reduce the potential risks that pesticides pose to human health (especially to infants and children) including:
- Reduce potential dietary risks to consumers;
- Reduce potential risks to homeowners;
- Reduce risks to agricultural workers
- Reduce the potential risks that pesticides pose to the earth's ozone layer, groundwater, aquatic organisms and wildlife;
- Increase the acreage under Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices;
- Improve pest resistance management practices; and
- Reduce trade barriers, where consistent with U.S. health and environmental protection standards.

To implement these goals in the registration queue, new registration actions are ranked as follows:

- Replacements for methyl bromide
- Reduced-risk pesticides and new uses for reduced-risk pesticides
- New uses to address USDA's vulnerable crops
- Tolerance petitions addressing minor agricultural uses
- Other Registrant-identified priorities
- Trade irritants (instances where U.S. tolerance levels differ from international standards)

EPA has proposed to give priority to organophosphate alternatives. Organophosphate alternatives that also qualify for reduced-risk would become the second highest priority after methyl bromide replacements. Organophosphate alternatives that do not meet the criteria for reduced risk but are deemed appropriate for expedited review will also receive priority.